N.J. environmental bill may violate federal law, EPA says

Tony Kurdzuk/The Star-LedgerN.J. state Sen. Barbara Buono (D-Middlesex), pictured in this 2010 file photo, sent a request to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to weigh in on the controversial bill.

TRENTON — The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said late today that portions of a bill pending before the state Legislature to delay and, in some cases, circumvent protections for New Jersey's drinking water supplies would lead to more pollution and may also violate federal law.

EPA Regional Administrator Judith Enck said in a letter to lawmakers that the bill (A4335), as it is currently written, could have "significant adverse impacts on water quality in New Jersey" and could "undermine years of comprehensive planning" if approved Monday.

Of particular concern, Enck said, is a provision in the legislation that would allow sewer extensions into farmland, forests and other remaining undeveloped open space without regard for how much new sewage nearby wastewater treatment plants could handle.

"I really think that’s the biggest concern, and not only may it be contrary to the Clean Water Act, it also defies common sense," Enck said in an phone interview.

Her letter came in response to a request by state Sen. Barbara Buono (D-Middlesex) to weigh in on the controversial bill, which has sparked a high-stakes battle between environmentalists and deep-pocketed developers, two of the more vocal lobbying groups in Trenton.

Supporters of the bill say it could spur tens of millions of dollars in construction work to help kick-start a bad economy. Critics contend that argument is a smoke screen for builders who want to cash in on valuable open space, resulting in far more water pollution.

The fierce debate surrounds rules approved in 2008 by then-state environmental chief Lisa Jackson, who now heads the EPA, to curtail development by limiting sewer lines and septic systems on more than 300,000 acres across the state.

Four years later, the protections remain in limbo because of confusion and bureaucratic delays. Builders say the resulting uncertainty has still stopped construction because financiers are wary of investing in any new projects. In addition, the Christie administration told a Senate panel last month that the rules are unwieldy and are being rewritten.

Assemblyman Albert Coutinho (D-Essex), a primary sponsor of the bill in the lower house, said he had not seen the letter but would review the concerns.

"There has been a lot of work that has gone into this and I don't believe we violate any existing rules, but I would have to see the administrator's statement to be able to give you comment," Coutinho said.

Larry Ragonese, a spokesman for the state Department of Environmental Protection, which supports the legislation and is also working on rewriting Jackson's rules, said Enck's comments were "disappointing."

"Obviously they don’t understand the situation here in New Jersey," Ragonese said of the EPA. "The plan in place is unworkable, it has unrealistic time frames, and the counties in New Jersey are unable to deal with this unwieldy bureaucracy."